Some good, long overdue, news. Andrew Shirvell, the Michigan assistant attorney general who’s been harassing a gay University of Michigan student, has been fired. Some details, from Freep.com:

Shirvell had been criticized for his blog in which he calls Chris Armstrong, the president of the Michigan Student Assembly, a radical homosexual, a Nazi and Satan’s representative on the assembly. Philip Thomas, Shirvell’s attorney, had said his client is expressing his free-speech rights.

The firing was confirmed in a statement this afternoon from AG Mike Cox, who said Shirvell was fired for conduct unbecoming a state employee, especially that of an assistant attorney general.

“To be clear, I refuse to fire anyone for exercising their First Amendment rights, regardless of how popular or unpopular their positions might be. However, Shirvell repeatedly violated office policies, engaged in borderline stalking behavior, and inappropriately used state resources, our investigation showed.”

According to Cox, Shirvell had, among other things:

Showed up at the home of a private citizen three times, including once at 1:30 a.m. … harass[ed] Armstrong’s friends as they were socializing in Ann Arbor … [repeatedly called] House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office, Armstrong’s employer, in an attempt … to cause Pelosi to fire Armstrong; Attempt[ed] to “out” Armstrong’s friends as homosexual — several of whom were not gay.

Oh, and he did some of this while at work, Cox says. And apparently lied to the Attorney General during his disciplinary hearing.

CLARIFICATION: Shirvell is not part of the MRM. I am posting about this because gay-bashing is an important men’s issue. See the comment by Sandy below.

Comments

>DarkSideCatEqual rights for victims doesn't minimize rape of women, making rape of women a political and money raising platform and the be all and end all of violent crime minimizes the experiences of other victims, they become othered. As well as that, telling impressionable young women lies about the nature of rape (that its political and gendered) and that that live in a "rape culture" is detrimental to their mental health and perception of reality. Just to add more to by response to Tec's ridiculous assertion that "we live is a society that treats women like scum".Women receive legal privileged and shorter prison term for equal crimes, men do pretty much all the dangerous, dirty and lower order jobs and ever measurable class of extreme hardship is dominated by men, homelessness for example.Tec, you like many young feminist behave like a child that thinks "life is sooo unfair" when every little thing doesn't go their own way. If you think women are treated like scum in this society, and women are more equal in most measurable well being classes, how would you describe the treatment of a boys and men?

>As for missing the point about the post.This student was well protected, the law moved against this idiot and a clear message was sent.It begs the question, where is the law when feminists are running similar and much more common campaigns, where is the law when the work or McKinnon and Dworkin is being promoted to young impressionable minds?

>@Cold – oh yes, pointing out Eoghan claims to be a member of marginalized group and his constant meme that feminism = racism against blacks is racist. Moron. I was pointing out he's sounding like a racist and telling him to get off his BS straight that feminism/=white women. @IR – yes, hate crimes are different than other crimes. Go learn something.Oh men are so underprivileged. (sarcasm) What you've described are either (1) complete BS or (2) products of patriarchy. Which guess what? Feminism is against. Oh, and yes, it's such a female privilege not being able to go out after dark because I might get raped and if I was it would be my fault for going outside. And if I got raped in my house, it would be my fault because I let him in. Or I didn't have enough locks on my doors or bars on my windows. Shall I go on? I could write a fucking book on the subject of male privilege and sexism, but others have already. But oh I'm sooo privileged, clearly.@Eoghan – you have no idea what you're talking about. As I said before, you rely on easily debunked What Feminists Believe (TM) memes to defend your points. The problem is you don't know what feminists believe at all, and it's rather futile to continue arguing with someone who doesn't know the subject they're supposedly opposed to.

>TecYou dont debunk anything, its all personal attacks and sarcasm, thats not debunking thats female teen relational violence.And you are quite aware that I never said that feminism was racism against blacks, I said that feminism runs the same rape hysteria political tactics as progressives did in the last century, its the exact same tactic, complete with rallies just targeting all men rather than black men specifically.Can you list the ways in which women are treated like scum for us please?And this"h, and yes, it's such a female privilege not being able to go out after dark because I might get raped and if I was it would be my fault for going outside. And if I got raped in my house, it would be my fault because I let him in. Or I didn't have enough locks on my doors or bars on my windows. Shall I go on? I could write a fucking book on the subject of male privilege and sexism, but others have already. But oh I'm sooo privileged, clearly".Is a package of hyperbole, paranoia, conspiracy theory and lies, thats not how reality is.

>Tec,What you said is what you said, but at least your ex post facto excuse is somewhat plausible, unlike David's completely unbelievable "That one line wasn't my POV even though the rest of the post was all my POV and you're just too dumb to notice the unmarked POV shift* excuse.* Paraphrasing, of course.

>"What you've described are either (1) complete BS or (2) products of patriarchy. Which guess what? Feminism is against."Well let's see, the false accusation point is most certainly not BS because there are mountains of examples to prove it is true, so therefore, if you're not full of shit, then it has to be "(2) products of patriarchy. Which guess what? Feminism is against." Problem is, I don't see feminists doing ANYTHING do fix the problem of false rape accusations, in fact I see them doing the opposite."and yes, it's such a female privilege not being able to go out after dark because I might get raped and if I was it would be my fault for going outside. And if I got raped in my house, it would be my fault because I let him in. Or I didn't have enough locks on my doors or bars on my windows."THAT is bullshit unless you can provide examples of courts making such rulings.

>"where is the law when the work or McKinnon and Dworkin is being promoted to young impressionable minds?"Yes, especially when Dworkin spoke out about and confronted other feminists who were endorsing and promoting such things as biological determinism to justify female superiority over males:Biological Superiority: The World's Most Dangerous and Deadly Idea

>And where is the law when feminists are advancing biological determinism to justify supremacy over males? That meme, along with Dworkin and McKinnons hate took root in mainstream feminist thought although the main feminist supremacist argument is based in the illusion of moral superiority.

>They weren't "advancing" biological determinism, it was apparent to Dworkin that some feminists, when making comments in a women's forum, were venting thoughts that smacked of biological determinism, and that is a concept to which she is clearly opposed. "although the main feminist supremacist argument is based in the illusion of moral superiority"That illusion having first been propagated by men…very influential men…to justify their superiority over not only all women but some other men and to institute it in law and tradition. Where was the law when men were advancing biological determinism to justify, amongst other things, supremacy over females? Does that make it right when women do the same to justify their superiority? No, of course it doesn't, and Dworkin chastised feminists who vented in such a manner, pointing out that their "wrongs" were no better than men's "wrongs". I guess that qualifies as hate speech.I see it still at some MRA forums, more often than not in Father's Rights forums or topics…the Father as rightful head of and authority over the family (which includes the wife who has no rightful authority in the family). Of course that pretty much denies the existence of same-sex couples, unless they decide upon the "gender role" that each of them takes. So much for egalitarian or humanistic."The law" isn't present at all online or offline forums, meeting, events, etc. when anyone is advancing anything.

>PamId argue that the moral superiority of women has likely always been propagated by women. Ive heard feminists theorizing that idea where men would put their coats in mud so that a "lady" could walk on them and also the idea that men would move the crude, solid oak furniture and doors for women was a clever plot to deny agency to women, it was much more likely that privileged women instigated these things, for their own benefit, IMO. I view AA and the lack of women in dirty jobs as the modern equivalents of of opening the solid oak door in crude hinges and placing a coat down in the mud.Even if it was men that instigated the female moral superiority myth, feminism is the main propagator, defender and exploiter of it today.As for father at the rightful head of the table, that must be some Christian type commentary, most mens rights people wouldn't bother with nonsense like that, it would be hypocritical because most object to the media maneuvering women into the role of main decision maker/consumer and men cast as hen pecked work horses.

>@ColdOh yes, False Rape Society is a really unbias source. (sarcasm) That false rape allegations are common has been debunked several times, by several people. "Is a package of hyperbole, paranoia, conspiracy theory and lies, thats not how reality is. "Hi Pot, meet kettle. "And you are quite aware that I never said that feminism was racism against blacks, I said that feminism runs the same rape hysteria political tactics as progressives did in the last century"Actually you did, twice:"Take back the night is todays equivalent of politically constructed, progressive era black rapist hysteria.""Black rapist hysteria, progressives took the actions of a minority and used them to create hysteria and hatred against a whole group. "And you've made comments previously about feminism being about white women.I don't understand how rape hysteria = racism is not inherently racist itself because:(1) it denies women of colour are raped(2) it assumes that whites can't be rapistsAlso, it's very ironic to term it "hysteria" given how Freud linked hysteria to actual childhood sexual abuse and rape:"1. Freud's procedure here, as elsewhere, is empirical. In this instance his conclusions are drawn from 18 case studies, all of which, he claims, bear out without exception his general thesis. Of these 18 cases, 6 are male, 12 are female.2. Freud searches in these 18 cases for a single cause that all of them have in common: this would be their uniform basis and would hence point to the general aetiology of hysteria. What is this shared element? A traumatic experience in childhood that is uniformly of a SEXUAL nature. …B. Freud's Basic Conclusions1. A sexual event experienced during infancy or childhood is the sole origin of hysterical symptoms. Thus, the aetiology of hysteria is situational, not physiological or genetic.a. Freud goes so far as to generalize childhood sexual abuse as the origin of all neuropathologies; it is, as he says, the "caput Nil" (the source of the Nile) for all the psychopathologies of adulthood.b. These sexual experiences can include innocent things like stimulation of the genitals during wiping, diapering, hygiene, etc., or can be actual instances of coitus-like acts of seduction during childhood.2. Freud delineates 3 groups of hysterics based on the source of this sexual stimulation:a. Assaults by adults: mostly practiced on women by men (fathers, uncles, brothers, etc.) where there is no consent. That is, rape or other forced sexual activities. b. Love relationships between an adult and a child; these are usually of a longer duration and are the manifestation of deeper emotional and affective bonds. Here genuine feelings of "love" are at work.c. Relationships between 2 children, usually brother and sister, whereby this situation presumes that one of the children has already been initiated into sexual activities by an adult (presumes "seduction" of one of the children previously)."http://courses.washington.edu/freudlit/Hysteria.Notes.html

>By the way, the grammatically correct, i.e. non-moron way to type that sentence is " Oh yes, False Rape Society is a really unbiased source. ". "Unbias" isn't even a word, and if it was then it would be a noun, not an adjective. Do consider taking remedial English classes, you moron.

>"Oh, and yes, it's such a female privilege not being able to go out after dark because I might get raped and if I was it would be my fault for going outside. And if I got raped in my house, it would be my fault because I let him in. Or I didn't have enough locks on my doors or bars on my windows. Shall I go on?"Where does anyone claim that?One more thing: I'm more likely to be assaulted in the dark and three times more likely to be murdered – because I'm a man. Yet you've only been blabbering about how "women are treated so badly." I don't care about your bitter paranoia about rapists clawing at your door. I'm the one more likely to be murdered here, and you don't even care. Now if a woman gets killed – EEEK! It was a hate crime! But the three men being slaughtered for every one woman, forget 'em. Saving men's lives isn't really our thing.

We Hunted the Mammoth tracks and mocks the white male rage underlying the rise of Trump and Trumpism. This blog is NOT a safe space; given the subject matter -- misogyny and hate -- there's really no way it could be.